Are jobs obsolete?

  On 9/9/2011 at 4:43 PM, encey said:

My program is like that, too. With the advent of computers, especially Watson, philosophy has become largely automated. You just give it a conclusion and one or two premises, and it fills in all the other steps of the argument for you. Alternatively, you give it a full argument and it will tell you where the error in reasoning lies. I've been waiting a month for it to give me the output to Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

This sounds fucking awesome. How can I gain access to this? We must become friends, encey. WE MUST>

"Are jobsolete?", is all I keep reading.

hey goDel I mostly agree with you I was just messing around because you hurt my feelings : D I will read the pdf and then come back. I would love to be proven wrong because automation scares me.

encey, your software reminds me of that robot that writes sports stories

http://thenextweb.co...ports-reporter/

and here is an even scarier one that writes papers on continental philosophy

http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

  On 9/9/2011 at 6:14 PM, m u st co n t r ol t h o 4 said:

hey goDel I mostly agree with you I was just messing around because you hurt my feelings : D I will read the pdf and then come back. I would love to be proven wrong because automation scares me.

 

encey, your software reminds me of that robot that writes sports stories

http://thenextweb.co...ports-reporter/

 

and here is an even scarier one that writes papers on continental philosophy

http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

Sorry if I did offend you. It was never my intention. I was just dicking the article you just happened to have linked to. There's no "guilt by association" as far as I'm concerned.

  On 9/9/2011 at 1:29 PM, xxx said:

  On 9/9/2011 at 1:19 PM, Coalbucket PI said:

  On 9/9/2011 at 12:46 PM, xxx said:

  On 9/9/2011 at 12:14 AM, delet... said:

  On 9/8/2011 at 4:41 PM, BCM said:

mine is. i was made redundant the other day.

 

oh nos, sorry man.

Ye--that sucks. I hope you don't lose your hardware. That was the first to go when my shit hit the fan.

 

I've thought about this article all day. I agree that technology is not the only reason for the crisis of abundant employment but it is definitely relevant to me. I want to work in a lab in a field that used to be called medical technology but is now called clinical laboratory science. The school I've applied to only takes 8 people. In 1933, the same school took 30 people. The reason has been automation. Based on what I know about where tech. is going in medicine, I can see even more ways that well-paid technologists could be eliminated. One area is microbiology. Currently, if an organism is suspected, you culture a specimen (blood, spit, piss, whatevs) to see what grows. This can take anywhere from 2 days to weeks and is extremely expensive.

 

As high-throughput genomics and other technologies get cheaper and faster, I can see a day where you provide no more than a finger prick's worth of blood and anything diagnostic you would ever need to know could be known in about 3 hours. The lab would then be just the unskilled technicians who draw blood, etc. and the engineers who would maintain the machines and production line. The employment crisis in the lab right now only spurs this kind of progress forward. If I don't get in, I've been thinking about things I could do that defy automation and technology, which comes full circle to the question in the first place.

I can imagine you running around a perpetually dark and rainy lab complex in a trenchcoat, 'retiring' centrifuges and automated lab equipment only to be followed around by some shady character who makes elusive remarks and leaves origami micropippettes in your apartment

I am currently parlaying this post into a full-blown screenplay. I'm at a crossroads though: Lars Von Trier or Uwe Boll?

Michael Bay - I think he would give the screenplay a more thoughtful treatment.

  On 9/9/2011 at 4:43 PM, encey said:

My program is like that, too. With the advent of computers, especially Watson, philosophy has become largely automated. You just give it a conclusion and one or two premises, and it fills in all the other steps of the argument for you. Alternatively, you give it a full argument and it will tell you where the error in reasoning lies. I've been waiting a month for it to give me the output to Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

*creates dump file on your mom's boot floppy*

ZERO C--

no wait

CRASH DUMP

  On 9/9/2011 at 9:17 PM, chenGOD said:

  On 9/9/2011 at 1:29 PM, xxx said:

  On 9/9/2011 at 1:19 PM, Coalbucket PI said:

  On 9/9/2011 at 12:46 PM, xxx said:

  On 9/9/2011 at 12:14 AM, delet... said:

  On 9/8/2011 at 4:41 PM, BCM said:

mine is. i was made redundant the other day.

 

oh nos, sorry man.

Ye--that sucks. I hope you don't lose your hardware. That was the first to go when my shit hit the fan.

 

I've thought about this article all day. I agree that technology is not the only reason for the crisis of abundant employment but it is definitely relevant to me. I want to work in a lab in a field that used to be called medical technology but is now called clinical laboratory science. The school I've applied to only takes 8 people. In 1933, the same school took 30 people. The reason has been automation. Based on what I know about where tech. is going in medicine, I can see even more ways that well-paid technologists could be eliminated. One area is microbiology. Currently, if an organism is suspected, you culture a specimen (blood, spit, piss, whatevs) to see what grows. This can take anywhere from 2 days to weeks and is extremely expensive.

 

As high-throughput genomics and other technologies get cheaper and faster, I can see a day where you provide no more than a finger prick's worth of blood and anything diagnostic you would ever need to know could be known in about 3 hours. The lab would then be just the unskilled technicians who draw blood, etc. and the engineers who would maintain the machines and production line. The employment crisis in the lab right now only spurs this kind of progress forward. If I don't get in, I've been thinking about things I could do that defy automation and technology, which comes full circle to the question in the first place.

I can imagine you running around a perpetually dark and rainy lab complex in a trenchcoat, 'retiring' centrifuges and automated lab equipment only to be followed around by some shady character who makes elusive remarks and leaves origami micropippettes in your apartment

I am currently parlaying this post into a full-blown screenplay. I'm at a crossroads though: Lars Von Trier or Uwe Boll?

 

Michael Bay - I think he would give the screenplay a more thoughtful treatment.

no no, there are only 3 people who could do this: the bad PT Anderson, Mc G, or the guy who just directed the Fast 5 movie